LL and PRP
 

Since I started doing PRP verifications, I have received a lot of assignments from PrimeNet which also have one completed LL test, like this one:
[URL="https://www.mersenne.org/report_exponent/?exp_lo=77229121&full=1"]77229121[/URL]

Will there be some mechanism put in place so this won't be assigned in the future to a LL DC?

[QUOTE=Chuck;491294]Since I started doing PRP verifications, I have received a lot of assignments from PrimeNet which also have one completed LL test, like this one:
[URL="https://www.mersenne.org/report_exponent/?exp_lo=77229121&full=1"]77229121[/URL]

Will there be some mechanism put in place so this won't be assigned in the future to a LL DC?[/QUOTE]

I tried to get that exponent assigned to me as an LL double-check using the manual web pages. PrimeNet refused.

The real question is why did this get assigned as both a first time LL and PRP in early January. The PRP and LL results came back just a few days apart.

[QUOTE=Prime95;491302]The real question is why did this get assigned as both a first time LL and PRP in early January. The PRP and LL results came back just a few days apart.[/QUOTE]

Here is another one like that:
[URL="https://www.mersenne.org/report_exponent/?exp_lo=76877783&full=1"]76877783[/URL]

And another:
[URL="https://www.mersenne.org/report_exponent/?exp_lo=77074519&full=1"]77074519[/URL]

[QUOTE=Prime95;491302]
The real question is why did this get assigned as both a first time LL and PRP in early January. The PRP and LL results came back just a few days apart.[/QUOTE]


This may be the explanation: before I left for 1month for the Xmas holidays, I got a larger set of manual PRP assignments to cover 1month of work; upon return (middle of January) I submitted the results. In the meantime, some exponents expired and were re-assigned to LL.


E.g. [URL="http://www.mersenne.ca/exponent/77074519"]77074519 [/URL]assigned as LL on 12 Dec to me, expired on 1st Jan. Probably at the time there were no manual PRP so it was reserved as manual LL.

An idea might be: if an exponent is reported as C by both a first-LL and a first-PRP, then it should be very-low-priority for double checking (either PRP or LL).

[QUOTE=preda;491312]This may be the explanation: before I left for 1month for the Xmas holidays, I got a larger set of manual PRP assignments to cover 1month of work; upon return (middle of January) I submitted the results. In the meantime, some exponents expired and were re-assigned to LL.


E.g. [URL="http://www.mersenne.ca/exponent/77074519"]77074519 [/URL]assigned as LL on 12 Dec to me, expired on 1st Jan. Probably at the time there were no manual PRP so it was reserved as manual LL.[/QUOTE]


You can keep an eye on the Assignments page and look when your exponents expire, when the expiration date approach you can ask for an extension. Just two days ago I asked for a 60 days extension for my exponents.

You said gpuowl is better used with 150M to 300M but what is assigned for PRP now is 85M.

[QUOTE=preda;491313]An idea might be: if an exponent is reported as C by both a first-LL and a first-PRP, then it should be very-low-priority for double checking (either PRP or LL).[/QUOTE]

They are low priority. However, there are so few first-time PRP tests that asking for PRP double-checking work will get you one of these exponents in the high 70M range.

[QUOTE=SELROC;491315]
You said gpuowl is better used with 150M to 300M but what is assigned for PRP now is 85M.[/QUOTE]

The manual page lets request an assignment in an exponent range.

[QUOTE=Prime95;491318]They are low priority. However, there are so few first-time PRP tests that asking for PRP double-checking work will get you one of these exponents in the high 70M range.



The manual page lets request an assignment in an exponent range.[/QUOTE]

If the fields are left empty, 85M is the current range.

[QUOTE=Prime95;491318]They are low priority. However, there are so few first-time PRP tests that asking for PRP double-checking work will get you one of these exponents in the high 70M range.[/QUOTE]

IMO, PRP double check doesn't make sense as a work category ATM. There are two reasons you'd want a doublecheck: 1) to get a smaller exponent, and 2) to check the reliability of your machine. With the current state of PRP testing, #1 isn't going to happen, and due to the error-correction, #2 doesn't work (the error check will rollback from any errors, and final result will eventually inevitably match). So, those asking for PRP doublecheck should be given first time PRP anyways? At least until leading edge of PRP is suffuciently ahead, so that #1 can be satisfied.

Also, is there a plan to eventually retire first time LL work type, and fully roll out PRP? Possibly something like: if client is not capable of PRP with GEC, then give them LL doublecheck, else give them PRP, regardless of whether they asked for PRP or LL.

[QUOTE=axn;491389]IMO, PRP double check doesn't make sense as a work category ATM. There are two reasons you'd want a doublecheck: 1) to get a smaller exponent, and 2) to check the reliability of your machine. With the current state of PRP testing, #1 isn't going to happen, and due to the error-correction, #2 doesn't work (the error check will rollback from any errors, and final result will eventually inevitably match). So, those asking for PRP doublecheck should be given first time PRP anyways? At least until leading edge of PRP is suffuciently ahead, so that #1 can be satisfied.[/QUOTE]


I signed up for PRP doublecheck because it was new and I thought the project might need some history of successful doublechecks. But if this is not the case I will switch over to first time PRP.

[QUOTE=axn;491389]IMO, PRP double check doesn't make sense as a work category ATM. [/QUOTE]
+1. :goodposting: As usual, axn shows a lot of common sense. :tu: